Loading...
2005 07-14 Special Meridian Plannina and Zonina Special MeetinalWorkshop Julv 14. 2005. A special meeting/workshop of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July 14, 2005. was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman David Zaremba. Members Present: Chairman David Zaremba, Commissioner Keith Borup, Commissioner Michael Rohm, and Commissioner David Moe. Members Absent: Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay. Others Present: Tara Green, Anna Canning, Brad Hawkins-Clark, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: Roll-call X Keith Borup X David Moe Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Michael Rohm X Chairman David Zaremba Zaremba: Good evening, everybody. Welcome to this Special Meeting/Workshop of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for July 14th, 2005. We will begin with a roll call of Commissioners. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Zaremba: Second Item is the adoption of the agenda. Since we only have one item and we are not likely to rearrange it, I will consider it adopted, unless I hear some great objection. Rohm: Makes sense. Item 3: Review of the North Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application: Zaremba: Okay. And, then, the real purpose of the meeting is Item 3, a review of North Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This is not officially a Public Hearing, which theoretically means there would not be comment from the public, but since it is a workshop and there are not a whole lot of people here, I don't see any problem being a little bit informal. If somebody has something they simply must add, if you would raise your hand, I will try and recognize you and work you into the conversation. And let's begin with remarks from the staff. Brad or Anna, who is starting? Brad. Thank you. Hawkins-Clark: I'll start and Anna is going to sit here brain dead for a little bit, I guess. I'm only repeating what she already told me earlier, so -- Moe: That would now be on the record. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14,2005 Page 2 of 33 Hawkins-Clark: Well, I guess I will just sort of casually walk through this. I mean if -- we are happy to use this as just a dialogue between you and staff and however else you want to handle it, but I had put a little bit more content to the agenda sheet that I hadn't given you and so thought maybe -- I'm very in mind that you were very clear at your meeting last week that you wanted to be out of here at nine zero zero. So, we will try to move through this as quickly as we can, but in terms of just what is this, reviewing the application, I think, Commissioner Moe, you might have been the only one that wasn't at our workshop -- I think Commissioner Rohm and Zaremba were at our workshop, so there might not be too much need to do that, other than to say that the Comprehensive Plan amendment application, we have, you know, our city process that we are going through and there are, as you know, only two opportunities in a year to do map amendments and we have received two other Comprehensive Plan amendment applications from private parties, just so you know, and I think we are proceeding on the schedule that we should, because of the city initiated ours first, but there are these two other parties waiting in the wings that when this goes through, I thought if you could be thinking about that and, Anna, too, as far as how we want to move those on. I think in the past we just had, you know, a set of hearings that have only been Comprehensive Plan amendment applications, separate from your regular agenda, and that's probably what we can anticipate, but we would have, potentially, at that first meeting we would have the north Meridian hearing and, then, we would have these other two. Zaremba: Refresh my memory. The most recent one would have been the project on Eagle and Pine. They were asking for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. I'm assuming the City Council took our recommendation to approve that or what happened with that? And when is six months from then? Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. Actually, the state statute says six months from your recommendation to the City Council, so -- which would be next week would be six months, believe it or not. Zaremba: That was six months ago? Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Zaremba: I was thinking two months. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. But, yes, the City Council did approve it. Zaremba: Okay. Canning: Even if they had approved it, the six months language kicks in. The state requirement only limits how often you can recommend approval for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. It does not regulate how often the City Council can consider Comprehensive Plan amendments or approve them. ~ '\ Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 3 of 33 Zaremba: Okay. Canning: And I thought we would just wait for an agenda where there was nothing on the agenda and a week where there is -- Zaremba: Where we don't have any applications for development and -- Canning: And, then, we could do it at that one. Zaremba: Yeah. That's August 33rd; right? Hawkins-Clark: Right. Okay. So, we got those applications kind of hanging out there, just so you know. Then, the area of city impact application, if you recommend approval of north Meridian amendment and it goes onto City Council and they approve it, then, an application would continue with Ada County to negotiate the changes to the area of city impact that are in this. Zaremba: So, the timing on that one is that we probably would want to beat Star's impact hearing on -- in September before the county? Star is -- Hawkins-Clark: Right. Zaremba: -- asking for some of the same area that we are talking about. I think. Aren't they? Is that what I'm interpreting here? Hawkins-Clark: No. They -- Ada County is hearing Star's for the areas that are not under dispute with Eagle, because the city of Eagle and the city of Star have some overlapping areas where they both have asked for an area of city impact. Zaremba: We are likely to have a dispute with Star and Eagle over the area between Chinden and the bench, too, aren't we? Hawkins-Clark: That's not expected, because staff's understanding, anyway, is that city of Eagle has agreed that the area between the Phyllis Canal and Chinden, that they would -- probably that they are not going to dispute that. So, they, actually, don't have an application and yet -- but we do have a couple property owners here tonight and that's one of the things on the agenda further down, but who are interested in being added to Meridian's area of city impact that is north of the canal and Eagle has not said that they are comfortable with that, at least to my knowledge. This last Tuesday, actually, Eagle City Council, as just as a discussion item on their agenda, talked about that area north of Chinden that was in their request. You know, their original applications they did want to go to Chinden, but their City Council backed up Mayor Merrill, who had met with Mayor de Weerd and talked about that area and said that probably makes sense, but Meridian requests it, because frontage on both sides of Chinden and probably the biggest reason is sewer, you know, just -- Meridian -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 4 of 33 Zaremba: Sewer and fire and I think the zip code goes there as well, not that that couldn't change, I guess. Hawkins-Clark: But your point about Star, they, to my knowledge, have not -- they haven't requested -- yeah. No. The city of Star's area of impact, their September 1 st hearing at Ada County, at least the map that I have, they do not go east of -- where are we at here? Star -- well, yeah, there would be, because here is McDermott. Canning: There is no overlap on the south side of Chinden on that little trunk that -- between the Phyllis Canal and Chinden toward the west side of the property. My understanding was that they had dropped that from their request at our request, because it was in our fire district. So, I don't think that that area is in dispute anymore. Zaremba: So, that means we are not under any time constraints to have an attitude before anybody else's hearing. We are just up to making our own decision; right? Okay. Well, sorry to interrupt. Hawkins-Clark: Besides the fact that -- yeah, I mean I just -- you know, the state does allow cities to overlap and all that. I mean the Council can approve, technically overlapping areas of city impact. I don't know that they have ever done that, but it is possible. I think they have kind of stayed away from that, but -- Zaremba: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: So, I thought maybe I would just go through a few of the -- starting on page three of the packet -- I guess not page three of the packet, page three of the sheet titled Comprehensive Plan amendment application. The page number is at the bottom. Zaremba: Three of ten? Hawkins-Clark: Three of ten. Yeah. Zaremba: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. And in the middle of that sheet we have got what staff feels is probably the three main requests that would be in this application. A is to expand the impact boundary north of Chinden to the rim and, then, west to McDermott Road to Can-Ada. And B, designate the land use -- new land uses and policies within the expansion areas and, then, amend existing land uses. And C, to create a new circulation map and those -- and, then, some new transportation policies that would address alternative transportation, as well as, you know, our vehicular transportation. So -- and, again, this is where staff is moving with this. You, as the Commission, please, if you have things that you think we should be looking at, you want us to add, us to research, please, give guidance. The area of city impact boundaries were -- that are in this application were given to us right on up by Mayor and Council, essentially. In part because of requests that Meridian received from property owners in those areas. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetingIWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 5 of 33 Canning: That is particularly true for the north area. I think the west area there is some question -- they wanted staff to look at it, but I'm not -- I have never gotten the feeling that Council was adamant one way or the other about whether we are included. So, I think that that would be an area of -- for the planning and zoning Commission to consider and have perhaps more thoughts on whether or not it should even be included. I think we just recognize that it was four square miles out there that nobody has ever talked about and there was a time somebody thought about it in one fashion or another. Moe: Just a couple of questions. Because I wasn't at the -- the other workshop and whatnot, I will be the one that's ignorant here somewhat. North to the rim, I assume, is, then -- the Phyllis Canal is right at that point, then; correct? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Moe: Okay. And, then, from that point we, then, are to the river beyond to the north; correct? I mean the river is north of that point; right? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Moe: Okay. I'm just trying to make sure I remember where we are at. Hawkins-Clark: I would say that's a good point for me. I don't have enough copies for the public, but there is -- oh, here. Moe: Okay. This is good. Hawkins-Clark: It's pretty small, but maybe help you get a sense for the area. Moe: Yes, it will. It's perfect. Hawkins-Clark: Okay. So, yeah, there is one change to that map that was presented at the workshop in May. Excuse me. Is -- if you look at the corner of Linder Road and Chinden and just go north from there. If you look at this 11-by-17 map, that was on the dias this evening, and you compare that to this eight and a half by eleven that I just handed out, you will see that at that corner there is a little chunk taken out. The Almaden Subdivision, two and a half to five acre lots, county subdivision, we removed -- several of those property owners have expressed concern and really do not want to be in Meridian's area of city impact and in many ways it probably does make more sense, then, to be in Eagle anyway, eventually, because of the -- you know, the large lot sizes and there is an identification geographically with them. So, also in the application, after that point there was several assumptions that are listed there. land use assumptions and transportation assumptions that we have been making for the last few months. I won't go over each one of those, but did want to point out that if you -- I think those are fairly important, so if you think that one of those really stands out to you that should not Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 6 of 33 be a key assumption as a part of this plan, it would be important to let us know early. So, I think if you're okay, we will just spend a little time actually looking at the map itself. Zaremba: I might comment or give a personal opinion about the western boundary that we were talking about. It's -- moving Meridian's area of impact over to Can-Ada follows the county line. I'm trying to think of what the logic would be for that four square miles to be attached to anybody else. It can't be attached to Caldwell or Nampa, because it's not in Canyon County. Theoretically, Star could eventually spread there, but -- Rohm: Yeah. I was going to ask that question. Is that the legalities of it, which a city can't expand beyond county borders? Borup: I don't believe so. Zaremba: Commissioner Borup has joined us and are you saying it is all right for a city to cross county lines? Canning: Yes, it is. And it is in the Star fire district. That's the other consideration. ) { Zaremba: The four square miles that we are talking along -- between McDermott and Can-Ada are in Star Fire District. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I was told by city of Star staff that they -- they have no interest, they have -- their council has not expressed any interest in going south of Chinden at this point. You know, I mean as Council's change, who knows, but, you know, at this point city of Star doesn't have sewer even south of the river. So, you know, they have got -- they would have a long way to go and to demonstrate to Ada County that they have the authority to provide urban services, you know, so -- and, also, in terms of the fire, at least our fire chief told me that if -- if a city annexes into a fire district that is not their own, that other fire district traditionally recognizes that -- that since it's now annexed into a neighboring jurisdiction, that they release those from their district, from the fire district. Zaremba: That's both a service and a taxing issue, I would assume. Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. In terms of bonding and the rates at which -- right. Yeah. I -- that issue is being dealt with right now between Eagle and Meridian on the north side of Chinden. So, we may want more as time goes by, because of that example, but -- but I think Anna brings up -- and it is a good point, that it is a different fire district out there, but-- Rohm: Currently. Hawkins-Clark: Currently it is. Right. All land needs to be designated in some rural or urban fire district, so -- yeah. But it is a little bit strange. I mean you have these four square miles that, you know, are out there bounded by Canyon County on two sides Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 7 of 33 and a state highway on the -- on one side. So, the larger planning question is, you know, is it appropriate for it to always just remain Ada County and never be annexed into anyone's impact area. So, those are kind of discussions that police -- Rohm: From my perspective, the growth that we have seen in the north area of impact has been so significant that it's not beyond comprehension that that expansion will continue and probably go right into that four square miles at such time that it is sewered and just a continuation of the growth that we have seen. Zaremba: Yeah. Rohm: I wouldn't be surprised. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Our Public Works Department is under contract with JUB Engineers as we speak to do a sewer study of that four square miles. So, at this point Ada County would not accept an area of city impact application, if you will, or negotiation, until we can clearly demonstrate that we have the ability service it. I don't -- Anna may correct me, but I don't think -- they don't require a full-blown study, but they do need something committing from the City Engineer that, yes, if we are going to give you this in the area of city impact, you need to demonstrate to us that you can service this. So, that's the reason for the study, which isn't anticipated to be complete until at this point November. So, that, in and of itself, if you were to recommend that we proceed with these four square miles, in here, it may be a timing issue there, because we would need to show Ada County that we can provide sewer out there. Yeah. Out here. Zaremba: Do we have the opinions of -- well, I guess the only opinion that hasn't been mentioned would be the police department. I was at a meeting today where the comment was made by the police department about how difficult it is to serve two sides of a freeway and if McDermott is going to be that type of a transportation system, the police department may wish we were not looking at those four square miles. Hawkins-Clark: Very good point, in terms of getting our police department's input on this whole process. We had not received anything from them yet. Zaremba: Yeah. Just a thought. I mean to me it seems logical, but we know as the valley grows, a lot of this area is going to fill in. The only other option would be to say that there is some mechanism to preserve a green area and it isn't ever going to be part of a city, but at present there is not a mechanism for that either, other than voluntary and, you know, people -- I guess they sell development rights to the nature conservancy or something like that. Canning: And that's what I was going to say. The state has enabled the use of transfer development rights, so that is a tool to consider. How well it would go over in Ada County or with our Council I don't know, but that is something that you can't -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 8 of 33 Zaremba: Or having us decide on behalf of all the people in those four square miles that that's what they are going to do and I'm not sure that's the right thing. I wouldn't want to take that attitude. Canning: Well, yes, we should probably do -- it would be appropriate to do more public participation before you did that. But that could certainly be something you recommend in the study as well, if you don't want to go that way, in including it in the area of city impact, you could recommend putting it in a referral area or something like that or sending area for transferred development rights and direct staff to work on the transfer of development rights program for that area. You'd have to set up a receiving area as well. Zaremba: I don't know about the others, but I guess my opinion would be if -- if, on the one hand, the assumption is that area will develop to urban uses, it makes sense to have it be part of Meridian. If it's going to do something else, then, it doesn't need to be part of Meridian. Canning: And those are the things you get to decide. That's why they pay you for the big bucks. Zaremba: Thank you so much. I missed my paycheck. Did you get it? Rohm: Well, it just seems to me that going with what we have seen over the last number of years, that this north of the freeway development all the way to Chinden has taken on the development that it has, that as these other square miles to the east fill in, that's the natural progression, and as long as the JUB study proves out that it's cost effective to expand sewer and water to those four square miles, it just makes sense that would be good development ground, from my perspective anyway. So, that being said - Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. It's very much a question, as Anna mentioned before, not as much of -- we didn't get as much feedback from private property owners in that area. And there are -- there is a couple of dairy operations out in these four square miles. You know, there is a tree nursery. Some churches. I mean it's clearly dominant ag uses today, but, you know, just -- I think the dairies and, then, there is a small cemetery -- I mean there is -- you know, just as far as the land uses that are out there today. And I think the ~. maybe this idea transfer development rights, since this valley hasn't seen it that much, that may be something if you want more explanation about how those work and how they operate, you know, it may be a candidate. But I think tied with that, maybe we could just go into Highway 16, because we -- you know, we are -- even if you do recommend that this be part of the area of city impact, our recommendation is that it remain preserved until we know the alignment of Highway 16. Rohm: I can tell you at the last workshop I worked at that specific station to those four square miles and a number of the people that were in attendance were property owners within that area and I got the feeling for sure that they were very supportive of being Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 9 of 33 included in our area of impact and could see the potential advantages to them as property owners to be part of our city. So, I thought that was interesting. ",¡ " Zaremba: Yeah. Borup: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Commissioner Borup. Borup: Probably the question I would have on this is why aren't we looking at the area south of here, from here to the freeway? ' Moe: That's-- Borup: I mean is it considered too large of an area to look at? I mean I think a good -- a good part of the city that's being developed now was in our impact area 20 years ago. Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner to clarify -- Zaremba: I'm not sure which area -- Borup: These are four square miles. The other -- from there to the freeway. Hawkins-Clark: Here is Ustick Road. Borup: Right. Hawkins-Clark: And that's Canyon County. Borup: Right. I know. Zaremba: But we already said we can cross county lines. Hawkins-Clark: Right. And the city of Nampa has planned that it's in their Comprehensive Plan and they have land use designations on it -- Borup: It's in our area of impact? Hawkins-Clark: It is. Borup: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: It's in Nampa's area of impact. Borup: Well, then, that answers that question. Has that just been recently? Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetingIWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 10 of 33 Hawkins-Clark: Yes, it is. Moe: This sheet doesn't show that, though. Borup: I thought like a year ago Nampa had not done that yet. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Right. Compass -- yeah, this data came from Compass and I think they did not receive updated Canyon County information when this map was created, probably. Borup: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: Oh, yeah. That's right. Okay. Borup: And the reason I brought that up is mainly -- or I mean one of the big things for me was the Can-Ada -- I mean the McDermott trunk line and how far to the west would that service. Hawkins-Clark: And Nampa city is currently under contract to build a very sizable lift station in their north area. It's about 90 percent designed and it would, essentially, be engineered to handle all that area. Borup: Clear to McDermott. Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Within that area of city impact boundary. Rohm: Has there been some communication between the city of Nampa and City of Meridian along that McDermott corridor from Ustick to the freeway? I see where our map indicates that it's designated as highway corridor on the east side of McDermott, but is Nampa progressing along the same lines as they have, they so designated in their area that that -- it's -- Hawkins-Clark: That's a very timely question. Steve Siddoway and I actually did just meet with Paul Raymond, who is the public works director for the City of Nampa, yesterday, as well as Norm Holmes, their Planning Director, and at least from those two staff positions, city of Nampa is not -- they are comfortable with the McDermott alignment. For them the bigger issue is the interchange at 1-84. That would be a whole other discussion, but mainly suffice it to say they have the Idaho Center and the auto mall and the BSU campus, you know, all around that Star, Can-Ada area, and that campus is expected to have 12,000 students at build out and, you know, the Idaho Center and just as that place continues, if you get more big box -- they are concerned about overloading the Garrity interchange. Rohm: So, they'd probably support the McDermott interchange. Hawkins-Clark: Well, they actually prefer Star. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meetlng/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 11 of 33 Zaremba: They would like one at Star-Robinson. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Rohm: Is that just one mile east of Garrity? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. As Brad said, the things that are in that mile between Garrity and Star-Robinson are likely to generate a lot of activity. Rohm: Well - but you get what - Star is one mile east of Can-Ada and you get the federal dollars every two miles and any other interchanges are at total local expense. Zaremba: Actually, that's the state of Idaho. ITO does that. Rohm: Is that what it is? Zaremba: When I first started hearing people say that the federal government wouldn't put interchanges closer than two miles -- I have lived in a number of places where they are closer than two miles and I went down to the federal highway administration and asked them where is that rule and they said it's not our rule. They -- every time there is a request for access, which is how you get an interchange, they go out and they study how far away the next one is and where the lanes would interweave, but they have no pre-set conception. Rohm: Well, I'm glad that you cleared that up, because -- Zaremba: And ITO - Rohm: Okay. Well - and it's probably pretty fair as a general statement that you develop every other mile and, then, if, in fact, needed, you fill in the one in the middle. Zaremba: And, actually, ITO's two miles is a rural two miles. Theoretically, they will allow them closer than that in urban areas. The Federal Highway Administration has no such rule. They look at each one individually. Rohm: Oh, man. Hawkins-Clark: But to get to the point of your question, Commissioner, yeah, Nampa is supportive -- at least staff is. They have not designated a preservation corridor, so to speak. But in terms of what - would they fight the City of Meridian if we sav McDermott is our preferred alignment. At this point we don't expect to. Rohm: Thank you. That was the point of the question. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 12 of 33 Zaremba: But I always have more information than you want. Rohm: No. No. I appreciate it. Hawkins-Clark: So, I guess while we are talking on that, was there any other questions from the Commissioners about the purpose of that on this map, this cross-hatched area? I guess one clarification, as you can see, we -- right now it's mapped at a half mile either side of McDermott and just so you know, we chose that from a conversation with Sue Sullivan at ITD and others, who made the point that when they go and do an environmental impact study, which they are required to do with -- if they build it with federal money, that they are required, as part of that NIPA EIS process to look at a broader spectrum than just one specific little lane, if you will. I mean they do have to take into consideration everything from geology to historic structures and uses, to flood planes, to seismic zones -- I mean it's an intense list of things they have to look at. And so it could be that that future alignment weaves a little bit or whatever. So, that's the reason for that being designated where it is. A few of the -- maybe I'll go -- on the number three, the first item, there was existing area of city impact land uses and those are probably pretty obvious to you, but if you were to compare our -- our adopted Comprehensive Plan today with this proposed one, you will see that -- a couple of main things to point out. One, is there is no half moon shapes on there. The neighborhood centers -- today, these three intersections on McMillan Road, here at Meridian, Linder, and Ten Mile, all have already been zoned C-G, at least at one of the corners, as part of either Paramount or Lochsa Falls or Bridgetower through the planned development process. So, we sort of factored that in and, then, also looked at what's the likelihood of this new interstate, you know, generating some commercial interest and, obviously, it's usually pretty high and so we may see some commercial demand up in here at one of these. We have also -- just to go back a little bit, we did designate these floating interchanges, so -- at Chinden and Ustick, so we were, you know, anticipating that the amount of commercial office type uses that would go into both the C-G and those areas, may be enough to meet the demand in this area alone and -- but, again, this is a draft and it's up for discussion and if you want to go with the half mile, but we felt that, you know, there -- there was a lot of discussion, particularly Commissioner Rohm and Zaremba and Borup now at that last round, about the half mile issue, and we did leave it on at Ustick between Meridian and Linder. The neighborhood center is still designated there, both on the north and on the south, and it's also still on there over at Heritage Commons area on Locust Grove. Now having said that, it doesn't mean that some of those principals of the neighborhood center, in terms of interconnectivity and public open space and pathway, can't be incorporated at the corners. Zaremba: That's what I was thinking. The push back has been from the development community to say they don't think the retail and commercial portions are viable on the half mile. They would rather see them on the section line roads. But that doesn't stop us from saying, okay, we are going to -- we are just going to move this theory a half mile over. We are still going to have the concentric ring of diminishing uses or -- I forget how we call it, but I have never seen that as being terribly opposed to the original Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 13 of 33 Comprehensive Plan that had them on the half mile, where it's w- I think we can have the concept and move them to the miles. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. And we would -- at this point that is our intent. I mean to keep a lot of principals in there. Zaremba: Yeah. Hawkins-Clark: So -- the large one on the current Comprehensive Plan, on Chinden we had -- there was one designated here between Ten Mile and Black Cat and there was another one designated between Locust Grove and Meridian. The one on Locust Grove and Meridian, we actually -- excuse me -- retained about half of that neighborhood center in just -- they had it follow the existing parcel lines. The other half we changed from mixed use to medium density residential and that, in part, follows an active application, the Westborough application up there, that's on that Jericho -- Zaremba: Uh-huh. HawkinswClark: Yeah. The other one on Chinden today is, as I said, between Black Cat and Ten Mile, that's Brighton Corporation's application is a part of that, the Bainbridge, that City Council approve a few months ago, and they -- if you may recall, held out about 60 acres at the corner of Ten Mile and Chinden, which was not part of their annexation, so -- and some of that mixed use did shift over to this square mile in Paramount. There is a mixed strip there today that's got mixed community, I think. Yeah. Mixed used community. There is a 40-acre parcel that's not a part of Paramount today, right on the southeast corner. Paramount does control a little bit of that, but there is also some that they don't, so, anyway, those mixed use policies would probably largely remain the same as today in terms, you know, it's not just straight strip commercial across there, but that's where we kind of reallocated some of that mixed use area. Also that intersection, Linder and Chinden, here at the north, there is -- it's a little bit of a funky piece to work with, because it's so shallow. There is an existing large lot county sub and, then, a -- some kind of a farm ag building there now and, then, only about 350, 400 feet and so if you assume, which is probably a fairly safe assumption, that that intersection is going to be widened at some point and may even have, you know, a grade level access, you know, ramps, things like that, you know, like an urban interchange or something, then, you know, you are going to chew up some of that corner. So, we put a mixed-use neighborhood on it, it's a key area, you know, it's one of the main -- going to be a large volume intersection. Residential just didn't seem appropriate, so -- they could still put residential, but -- oh, yeah. And, then, on the east side of Linder Eagle area of impact is anticipated to also have some commercial there, so -- don't know if there is any other areas in our current area of impact to point out. We reflected on this map the -- all of the land uses that -- applications that have been approved, you know, current zoning is now shown on there. Tried to put schools where the school district has land. Oh, the wastewater treatment plant, it's about 450 acres are in the MUWWTP District and -- this map is such small scale, but at the north end here, Drawbridge Subdivision is being built today, it's 18,000 square foot lots. It's our , '4 Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetingIWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 14 of 33 estate lot subdivision in north Meridian today. That is one of these five acres across from Bridgetower. The one behind it is -- was designated in the mixed use and we -- staff has had some communication with them. We changed that to allow for the low density residential, again, part out of equity, since they are neighbors, you know, immediately to the east already have been approved that way, but no access as well, so -- so that is one change. The rest of it we did keep, so there would be no new residential permitted in that area. There was several comments that we received at the May open house from folks who have property in this area, who are, frankly, frustrated and, you know, concerned that they can't get any new residential and the viability of commercial and industrial uses, which is, basically, what our policy says they need to have, is not very good, in their opinion. So, the question is, you know -- you know, do you want to consider changing that -- obviously, the Public Works Department needs to have some pretty key input into this and we have not met with them so far to get that conversation. There is a noise and odor study that was done that -- of the plant and, you know, it shows sort of the impacts of both noise and odor and it, interestingly enough, follows pretty closely what we have designated here where it sort of gets to a point of acceptable levels. You know, for humans anyway. But there is a little -- a possibility that on this west side we shave some of that mixed use area off and allow it to go to a residential, so -- did you want to add anything on that? Canning: Brad is also asking for -- as part of this study, we are going to request funds to do a market absorption in the north Meridian area of nonresidential uses and one of the key things for this wastewater treatment plant area -- it's always been that they don't have good enough access to 1-84, thereafter, it's not appropriate. Well, if we assume that that Highway 16 extension goes in, then, all of a sudden they have pretty great access to a highway and 1-84. So, it will be interesting to see the results of that. And, also, just to know whether we have shown enough commercial and office in the north Meridian area or if we need to get some additional areas in there. And, then, I think the only other commercial area Brad forgot to talk about is the four square miles right at the corners. That's kind of a potential little neighborhood center there as well. We made it very small on the -- Star, on the other side of Chinden, designates a commercial area, so we have kind of mimicked that on the south side of Chinden. Zaremba: The study you're talking about to see how much commercial use could be absorbed there, are you including the four square miles on the west in that? Canning: Yes. Zaremba: It just seems to me, along a corridor like that, if we also preserved frontage roads and things like that, that could be major commercial and industrial development. I meant that's just an opinion, but, again, from having lived places where I have seen this happen. Hawkins-Clark: The market analyst that spoke to, you know, he said these market absorption studies are pretty broad and it's not like you define here is your -- like a Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 15 of 33 transportation study, you know, I mean there is a lot of sort of influences that they look at regionally. But we will certainly ask them to look at this area in particular. Zaremba: Well -- and the subject has come up before. One of the applicants one time, I forget who, in trying to get a residential into the area next to the wastewater treatment, was telling us that we had far too much set aside for commercial. And not being an expert, of course, the logic of their numbers, he made it sound logical. But, again, as Anna said, if -- if there is going to be access to an interstate type roadway within a mile and a half of this, we could actually make it more attractive by making sure that that portion of Ustick is wide and amenable to trucks and we can make it happen. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. That's a great point. We were just talking about that before this meeting and it hadn't really struck me yet, but if this interchange -- if this -- if Highway 16 gets built and they put an interchange at Ustick and if it's two miles spacing, just like 1- 84, yeah, you're correct, this area becomes only a mile away, and may help us justify some of that area. Zaremba: Uh-huh. Hawkins-Clark: Two or three other key areas to look at -- or talk about in terms of nonresidential. Along Chinden -- the north Meridian area plan that did not get adopted that Wardle and Associates put together, as you may recall, actually showed just mixed use regional across here and they -- you know, that group of folks thought that a state highway, you're just going to naturally see -- do you really want residential against that. You know, we -- right now this plan designates a small little area about ten to 15 acres at the half mile across from Brighton's project that was approved that I mentioned earlier, the Bainbridge, and this is based on some initial discussions with the property owners who have control of about 300 acres in this area. And they, actually, originally, came to us showing much more commercial, but after further research, they paired that down. So, that commercial area does reflect their interest and kind of what they would like to see. Do you have any feedback for us on other areas along Chinden, particularly you know, at -- at the intersections where, you know, Ten Mile and Black Cat come in, bearing in mind that the influence of this interchange down the line is going to be pretty strong. Right now there is this mixed use at -- at Star, in part, to match what the city of Star has shown, which they have shown commercial on the north side there, as Anna mentioned earlier, but what's shown here underneath the corridor as low density residential is really not very feasible, but you know, part of my thinking was, you know, how much time and energy do you want spend on designating land uses and an area that the whole goal was to preserve it. I mean there was some logic to say just don't put any land use designation under there, you know. And particularly if it's something non- residential. Zaremba: I think I have expressed my opinion and it's not -- it's not etched in stone, but it's a direction that I lean, along Eagle Road and Chinden Road and the areas along the interstate and future McDermott, is if it becomes to be the same thing. My feeling is if you picture those areas as having an awful lot of traffic and most of that traffic not Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meetlng/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 16 of 33 actually being Meridian traffic, if they are coming through here anyhow, we ought to figure out a way to make them stop and spend money. So, I tend to agree with the Wardle study that says that along the Chinden corridor it's going to be a busy enough traffic area that it may not be attractive to have residential right against it and the city can take advantage of maybe getting some money out of the people that would pass along it, to give them reasons to stop and leave a few dollars here. So, I -- you know, again, to some extent it's market driven, but I certainly would not have a problem with all of Chinden developing commercial within an eighth of a mile of Chinden and, then, I'd go back to residential. That's just an opinion and, like I say, it's not etched in stone, it's just -- "\ ! Hawkins~Clark: Sure. Well, I think -- I mean that would be a significant change if -- you know, to this map if you -- I would appreciate more discussion, if that's a direction you want to give us, because -- Rohm: Well, only with the caveat that there is not multiple ingress-egress onto Chinden, that there would be frontage road internal to that commercial development, so that the flow isn't impeded by development and you still have the ability to maintain traffic speeds at 50 or 55 on Chinden as it goes through that -- that area. Zaremba: I think with Lochsa Falls didn't we require only one access and a back-age road or something like that? I don't think we allowed them access to Chinden. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. That's correct. Yeah. And maybe Anna wants to talk a little bit more about the.- you know, the UDC, the Unified Development Code, was -- had a new section added after your hearings about state highways and access and -- Canning: Commissioners, we are trying to limit access at the half miles, with backage road and, then, you all did get to comment on it and your recommendation was for right- in, right-out only at the quarter mile, but the Process Improvement Group has recommended right-in, right-out, left-in. So, the only thing they have taken out is left out. I think that the quarter mile access points will get severe opposition from ITD and I suspect -- you know, this is my mind reading game that I do with the Council, but I suspect Council will limit the quarter mile access. So, we have some in place to look at that. But with regard to putting all of it mixed use, I would caution you that all of a sudden it starts to look like Eagle Road or starts getting demands similar to Eagle Road and you want to look at what's across the street as well. Here you have an established one-acre lot subdivision with expensive homes. Very expensive homes on the north side of Chinden. In this area -- you can't see it on the overhead, but the parcel pattern in here, unless someone acquired every single parcel, piecemeal development of that would be darn near impossible. So, you would having continual request for direct access to Chinden. So, that actually occurs all along here. So, I would give you a cautionary note in that area. And, then, again, look to what's across the side of the street. These folks followed our kind of half-mile thing -- thing -- sorry. Neighborhood center concept and put a little commercial there. Obviously, Brighton Corp held out that 60 acres in the hopes of putting commercial development at this corner, but is that Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 17 of 33 appropriate. If there is residential here, a large lot residential there, medium lot residential there, is this an appropriate location for commercial and -- or in this case should it switch to -- shift to the half mile. Those are considerations. Rohm: Yeah. I don't think that any of us want to see another Eagle Road. It's so congested that it almost defeats the purpose of the lanage that's available, just because of access from the quarter mile and other access points. And if, in fact, Chinden develops to minimize that, maybe we just go with cross-access agreements and you still end up with just half-mile access to Chinden and you just don't -- you don't grant a development with access. I don't know -- you know, we will just have to see how that goes, but I sure don't think we want another Eagle Road. Hawkins-Clark: Would point out that this Lochsa Falls mile we actually have already no -- we have formally accepted an application, but it has been submitted for this 40 here at the corner of Ten Mile and Chinden and, then, there is the school and Lochsa already has office approved here. So, this mile is, for the most part, spoken for. This mile, as Anna just mentioned, you have that piece there that Brighton has, and, then, the mile where Paramount is, we have already designated mixed use. And, then, the last full mile is just between Locust Grove and Meridian Road and there is also mixed use there and so, practically speaking, the only place we would really look to add new mixed use would be in -- you know, in this mile -- Section 27, so-- Moe: Yeah. As I look at the map, that's basically where Brighton Corp's looking to do something around the corner or whatever and that's about the only area that I think is left, because you do have enough mixed use to the east. I think that would be great. Hawkins-Clark: Another thing that we are somewhat bound by is assuming that the City of Meridian wants to support it, is the Blueprint for Good Growth that's going on right now. It's a regional plan that the city and county have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on and so far we say we want to abide by it, but one of the principles of that plan is that if you take a city's planning area, they are designating a certain number of population, a certain number of households, and a certain number of employment within each area of city impact and, you know, this is the model that they are using and they are saying here is -- here is, basically, what you have to work with based on this control total, you know, at 2030. Zaremba: They are giving an actual number limit or they are giving a percentage of -- a balance? Hawkins-Clark: Well, yeah, I mean the cities, obviously, have their -- can play with those, but I mean there is -- they are saying here is the basic ratios. Yeah. And so for Meridian, you know, we have to remember to take in our whole planning area in this Blueprint for Good Growth process and by the time you start factoring in the alley for a corridor, Silverstone, EI Dorado, Eagle Road, we start to get a little bit pinched with where we put mixed use in commercial, frankly, in terms of that -- those numbers right now. So, I mean I just point that out, that we -- as long as we -- if we want to honor that Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 18 of 33 process, we should at least have to -- you know, we will have more information on that in the next couple of months, but right now what's shown here is about as much mixed use as that plan is going to accommodate. Rohm: That's interesting. Hawkins-Clark: Let's see. A couple other things, since we have got about 15 minutes here. Let's put this up. The first page in your packets tonight was a sheet called North Meridian Area individual area of city impact expansion. For lack of a better term, it just says lower rim area, and the reason that that is in there -- a couple of the folks that have attended tonight, this is why they are here. The property -- again, here is -- here is Chinden. This is our more regional map, so here is the Phyllis Canal that -- basically on the rim here. And, then, you have this area between the Boise River. As we mentioned at the very beginning, this is -- this is an area that Eagle city currently has in their proposed area of city impact that has not been yet approved by Ada County, but their City Council has approved it. The request is for the city to consider including some of this area in our area of city impact application to Ada County and their -- their property is approximately 390 acres. If you add up all the acreage in between the river and the canal from McDermott, you know, over to Linder, it's just under 1,500 acres. So, their portion is about 28, 30 percent of what -- of that whole area. You know, clearly, this is just an absolutely beautiful area down in here, of course, as you go down, a lot of it is in the one hundred year and five hundred year flood plane. If you can go down the street you will just see -- I was just trying to point out some of the facts of who has jurisdiction in there. Some of the public street connectivity, flood plane issues, et cetera. The sewer question is one that we can't answer right now. At least in detail, because there hasn't been a study. But Eagle city is -- as part of their application, doing a study in that area, which I understand is expected to be done reasonably soon, and that would tell everyone -- you know, give a much better idea about sewer-ability down there, but -- now, one thing that's for sure, if you come to Meridian you're going to have to pump up and over the rim, so -- and we all know that. The other issues about, you know, does it -- their statement to us was this -- you know, this property is Eagle -- I mean it's Meridian area of city -- or area code, they feel like -- very much a part of Meridian in terms of shopping and a trade area, you know. There is no way to get across the Boise River, obviously, in this area, unless you go out to either Star or Linder. So, pretty much everybody goes up to Chinden and, then, you either head east- west or into Meridian, so -- Rohm: Do the City of Eagle's city limits currently cross the Boise River at any point? Hawkins-Clark: Not west of Linder, but east of Linder they do. Borup: Clear to Chinden. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. They go up to Chinden. Zaremba: At Banbury and that stuff along there I think is all Eagle. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 19 of 33 Rohm: Okay. Okay. I'm just .. but not west of Linder. Okay. Hawkins-Clark: That's my understanding. Yeah. Rohm: And I guess another question -- well, if they have already crossed east of Linder, then, do they have separate sewer facilities on the south side of the Boise River from that which they have on the north? I'm not sure how that -- I guess that's how that would work. You have two different sewer treatment plants or do they cross the river with -- Hawkins-Clark: I don't know in that particular instance, Commissioner Rohm. But I mean, you know, there is examples of boring underneath rivers, of course. I mean there is everything, I mean aerial crossings and -- you know. Not that we would want to do that, but -- but Eagle sewer district, they have a memorandum agreement with Boise city, you know, to pump in that area that's along Chinden, to pump their waste to Boise city, who actually treats it. Rohm: Oh. Interesting. Hawkins-Clark: You can see on this map where Eagle's area of city impact, they have designated these uses over here. Zaremba: I was going to ask a similar question. What we have are two barriers, essentially. The Phyllis canal and the river. You could make an argument for stopping your area of impact at either one of them and I was thinking, similar to Commissioner Rohm, all right, if we were to serve all the way to the river, how is Eagle dealing with how they cross the Phyllis canal and serve the south side, since they are basically north of it, how are they serving the south side. We have the same question. We are south of it, how do we serve the north side of it. But it depends on which barrier you pick. I mean the river is a barrier and, you know, I certainly am in favor of having anybody in Meridian that wants to be in Meridian, you know, but it's nice that they'd rather join us. Rohm: And I don't know if it's appropriate, but I would like to know their logic, why they would prefer Meridian over Eagle, if any -- would you like to make comment? Zaremba: Does anybody care to comment? You do need to be on the microphone, sir, and state your name and address, please. Ewing: I'm John Ewing, 1500 EI Dorado -- Zaremba: Pull the microphone closer to you. Thank you. Ewing: John Ewing. 1500 EI Dorado, Boise, Idaho. I wasn't really prepared to speak for the two girls, but the property that they are here on is their parents rights now, the Aldape Ranch, and the public been -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14,2005 Page 20 of 33 Zaremba: Can we have you transfer to the hand-held microphone? I'm sorry. That seems to be causing some problems. Ewing: Well, anyway, I think that the main reason is they have always been part of Meridian. Her parents have lived in Meridian, went to school in Meridian, they have a Meridian address, Meridian phone number, and it does seem to just be a natural thing to have -- have them still be in Meridian. Where the new proposed subdivision that is going to hopefully go into Meridian is just above the Phyllis canal, just going straight back. Seems to be a natural thing to be in Meridian, even though the sewer does need to be pumped up. I believe that probably getting sewer up is as easy as getting it across the river. Their east boundary is Spur Wing Golf course for part of their property and, then, you know, that would lend itself to a very nice subdivision down there they feel. The other thing is -- and I think it come up in one of the workshops, either Peggy or Sherry had brought up that they do have river frontage back, you know, on their short north end of their property and it was even talked about maybe, you know, putting some of that ground down there as a park right on the river and I don't know -- you know, I think that that's probably the only place that -- well, I know that's the only place that Meridian comes close to the river. Another thing is that there no real access down there, other than coming from the south end. There is -- you know, I see there is a proposal for McDermott going through, which is a couple miles west and, then, Linder is the next one with, you know, quite a bit of property between there. I think this whole thought process of when their neighbors up on top have wanted a pretty elaborate subdivision up there and a roadway and everything and that's a natural place to get access down there and continue the nice subdivision atmosphere down there on river in that farm ground. We have had a little conversation with the neighbor to the west and, like so many people in that area, Dr. Orme is older and retired right now and his first comment was is I don't want anything to change. You know, he doesn't want anymore growth in Meridian or Ada County or state of Idaho. Although after visiting with him, he knows that he's not going to get his wishes and, you know, he supports going into the -- shared with me that he would support going into the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. So, I believe right now -- you know, I mentioned the phone number, the zip code and everything. I think that they are in the Meridian fire district, too. So, they are already getting, you know, services from Meridian. And so I don't know if I did a good job of speaking for the girls, but would you like to add anything? No. Did I answer the question or did I just ramble on like I usually do? Zaremba: You answered my question. Borup: Just a clarification for mine. I think I understand it. You're saying you'd be in favor of going clear to the river? Ewing: Yes. That's -- and the Aldape property does go clear to the river. Borup: So, it's south -- north of the canal down below the rim? \: ¡ , Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 21 of 33 Ewing: It's all north of the canal. Yes, it is. Borup: Okay. I'd particularly like the idea of a park on the river. Rohm: Well, I like that, too. Zaremba: Neat idea. Yeah. Thank you, sir. Rohm: I guess I -- my question of staff would be was there a particular reason why staff did not consider the inclusion north of the canal? Is -- just because city of Eagle had already kind of had their eyes on it or -- Canning: Partially. The expansion of the area of city impact was really prompted by -- at the request of property owners that suggested taking it to the rim. So, that's as far as we went. The City Council, in general, and the Mayor, had wanted to support requests for annexation. So, this one has come up fairly recently, compared to the other ones. But it was a disputed area between Star and Eagle, I believe, but Ada County gave it to Eagle. But our fire district, the rural fire district has always been very concerned that it is in their fire district and the way -- this whole fire district issue is a little interesting, because Eagle fire district is not a part of Eagle city, yet, when Eagle city annexes, the Eagle Fire District claims that they, then, have jurisdiction over areas that the city of Eagle annexes. My understanding is that our rural fire department has -- I don't know if they have taken it to court, but there is the legal issue of this in some formal manner, is what I understand. So, I don't know where it is in the process or anything like that. So, they are trying to get back all the areas that -- in the Eagle Fire District that were -- that are their rural fire district, really. So, they have always been very concerned about this area and it's important to them that it stays in the rural fire district or in the city fire district at some point for their funding. We have the only fire district that is both a rural and a city fire district and share resources. So, the rural fire district is entirely dependent upon the areas that are outside the city, but are inside their fire district and as other fire districts come and take that away, basically, they are losing all their taxable ground. They are going out of existence. So, it's a big concern to the fire district. So, certainly, for that reason it would be important. Also, the library district follows the river. There are a number of other districts that follow the river and are not quite as important sometimes, but there are other ones. Now, I think I'm rambling. Sorry. Zaremba: Oh, I certainly would support aligning all of those -- you know, aligning our area of impact with districts that relate to us. I wasn't aware that the zip code went that far north, but that makes sense as well. Not that the postal service is right about everything, but if they at sometime determined that this is an area that's easy for them to service, then, it would seem like police and fire might think in the same boundaries. I could see including it in our area of impact. Any other opinions? Moe: Oh, I would definitely agree and for the point that it already has been pretty much Meridian, thereafter, I would rather just see it stay that way as well. I guess the only -- the only point I make, the area that we took out that is on -- at Linder, that area, you Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 22 of 33 know, that those homeowners, they are the ones that do not want to be in Meridian itself, I mean it would be nice to have been able just basically to follow Linder down to the river and, then, take it across. I mean -- but, again, I would definitely like to see us go to the river, if, in fact -- I mean based upon the report here, it seems like everything is Meridian's. Canning: Commissioner Zaremba, it's getting close to 9:00 and we only have two other people in the audience that didn't speak. You might just ask them if they wanted to -- Rohm: You're welcome to. Zaremba: We have to have you speak on the microphone, though. We would like to have your input. Thank you. State your name and address, please. Spriggel: My name is Robert Spriggel. My wife Judy. We live on McDermott Road -- west side of McDermott Road between Ustick and McMillan. We are just interested in what's going on and just trying to find out what the take out is for that half mile and what's the impact going to be on us in the future. We own this small property there, about 16 acres. So, it's a learning thing for us right now just to find out what's going on. Rohm: Were you folks at the last -- Spriggel: No. Zaremba: The open house. Spriggel: Did not know about it. Rohm: Oh. Okay. Thank you. Spriggel: That was another question. Is there a method to notify property owners in the area or -- Rohm: I think all of these meetings are noticed in the newspaper, but I don't think each individual property owner, when the scope is this big, gets personal notification. Zaremba: I think there was some effort to notify people for that open house, wasn't there? Hawkins-Clark: There was, Commissioner, and I have added the Spriggels to our list, because Judy called and requested I think, so -- we have maintained a list for anyone who is interested, but have not, correct, notified everyone. That meeting, everybody who owned -- I think we had to make a point -- we had to make a cutoff point somewhere. I think we chose 30 acres or more were notified. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 23 of 33 Spriggel: And just what I have picked up here, it sounds like the proposed Highway 16 coming down McDermott Road, it sounds like first that that is the preferred road, possibly, and it sounds like it's going to be a fairly major highway with limited access. So, I guess what I don't understand or need to ask is if you own property that only has access on that road, how would you get access or what becomes of your property if you can't get onto this new highway? And one more question. How far out is that? Are we talking then years, 20 years, or five years? Rohm: Those are all pretty good questions. Zaremba: Ten is probably the closest, 20 might even be -- Anna. Canning: Let's see. We will try the big question first. The timing. It does seem to be part of the push of the governor to get his north-south road, so I think there will be emphasis on that. Probably be between 2010 and 2020 is as far as I'm willing to guess, but probably on the closer side of that, I would imagine. Regarding the access, that is a challenge and probably what will need to happen is that as the properties either north or south of you develop, we will require a frontage road be provided parallel to Highway 16, either -- either to allow -- either right next to the right of way, so that it's just road -- frontage road and, then, Highway 16, or to allow some development in between. But we will just require those stubs as they go down. So, you'll probably have to wait until the property -- intervening properties either going north or south develop. If you're right smack in the middle of the section, you're kind at the mercy of folks, so -- where you're at, so -- or it could go east or west, you know, there is a possibility there. But it is one of those cases where you probably have a wait for the intervening properties to develop. Spriggel: The highway is to be somewhat like a freeway or a five lane or-- Canning: It is -- I think right now we are assuming it's at least five way limited access freeway, so there would be access a Chinden and at Ustick. And, actually, as ITD does their studies, they may be proposing to construct frontage roads for those properties along McDermott. I -- they don't know yet. But that could be a part of their work program. Spriggel: Thank you. Zaremba: Thank you. Rohm: Thank you for coming. Zaremba: Are there other issues you wish to have opinions about or have we touched most of them? Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I guess to summarize a couple of your key ones, you are at this point in support of keeping the four square miles in. I heard a general consensus on that. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14,2005 Page 24 of 33 Zaremba: I believe we have consensus leaning that way, yes. Hawkins-Clark: And the McDermott alignment is something the Commission is in support of. Zaremba: For Highway 16. Hawkins-Clark: For Highway 16. Zaremba: As opposed to -- it's probably too late to do it anywhere else. Hawkins-Clark: Well -- and the idea of dividing the communities, too, I think is just -- And we will certainly approach the police and that, but I mean if -- as you well know, I mean on the few instances where the police department has been asked for specific comments -- I mean even on applications in our area of impact, they -- they are stretched so thin they would prefer to annex even those, so -- Zaremba: Well, at some point I suppose the solution is to have a sub station out that way or something, I guess. Hawkins-Clark: Taking the boundary to the river. I heard general support. The request -- certainly these -- from my standpoint, you know, it does not make sense to include just one property, I mean we would want to include that whole chunk. Zaremba: Basically from Linder to Can-Ada? The river from Linder to Can-Ada? Rohm: I personally like that idea a lot. Borup: Especially if we are talking about a park down there. Zaremba: That could be very attractive. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I mean just to clarify, Star, their application that's on September 1 st, is over to McDermott. So, I don't think we would go as far as any further west than that. Of course, even that -- I mean I think it's very -- I just definitely want to point out that -- that I'm 95 percent certain Eagle, you know, would -- they will oppose it, just so you know. I mean that will be a point of discussion, but Star -- and maybe even where the Highway 16 alignment ends up, you know, is maybe even another more logical place. I think Anna mentioned that. So, the difficulty with that, of course, is we are not going to know that for several years, so -- Borup: So, basically, what you're saying, just extend the area that's north of Chinden now, just extend it to the river. :ï I I , Rohm: Right. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14,2005 Page 25 of 33 Zaremba: Okay. Rohm: We'd like to see you consider that for sure. Moe: Yes. Borup: Now, while we are on Highway 16, has there been any discussion of the tie-in from Ten Mile, other than a pencil line on a map? Canning: I'm not sure I understand the question. There would be a new intersection, there would be a new interchange at McDermott is what they are proposing. Borup: Oh. McDermott and the freeway. Canning: Yeah. Borup: Okay. Canning: And that would be the one that Nampa might contest, asking to drag it more toward Star. Borup: So, that would eliminate the tie in from Ten Mile that was discussed previously. Canning: Correct. Ten Mile would be their own interchange and just-- Borup: So, you're talking about having the road swing over? Rohm: I'm not opposed to having both Ten Mile and McDermott. Borup: That's what Anna just said. Canning: Yes. That's the proposal. Borup: Ten Mile would still happen first, right? Canning: Right. Zaremba: But the issue Commissioner Borup is raising is there have -- there has been discussion that the extension of Highway 16 would be Ten Mile and 1-- Borup: Well, the ones I have seen earlier would be west of Ten Mile, but, then, there would be a tie-in to it. Zaremba: Yeah. Or coming down Black Cat and having a coat hanger over to Ten Mile. I think we are substituting trying to focus attention on McDermott for all of that. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetingNVorkshop July 14,2005 Page 26 of 33 Borup: Much better idea. Zaremba: Yeah. Canning: All of those discussions have pretty much gone by the wayside. I think with the passing of the GARVEE bond proposal, we focused on a separate new interchange for Highway 16 extension. Borup: Don't have all that interior mile right of way to worry about. Moe: Right. Zaremba: It would be tough to get the right of way along Ten Mile or Black Cat to do it. Hawkins-Clark: And a general point, looking at more mixed use, possibly based on absorption. And just to clarify again, we -- assuming that the City Council approves it, we have asked for this market study or I guess Anna just needs to approve it. So, that would tell us, at least generally from one market analyst, what kind of this area would take on, but I think that we had talked about, you know, that Chinden corridor and at least in the one square mile adding more, but do you want to give us more direction there? Moe: Well, I know that Commissioner Zaremba said he'd just as soon see quite a bit more there. Zaremba: I'm not stuck on it, but I'd load it up with as much commercial as we can sell. Moe: I'm not so sure that I'm opposed to the way it is, other than the fact that I am sure that we are going to see something between Ten Mile and Black Cat on the south side with Brighton Corp's development there. I think at that point that's enough, but that's my opinion. Borup: And I'm probably closer to Commissioner Zaremba that I think, you know, whatever the market will bear. I'd like to see some of that market driven, but I feel very strongly about Chinden and the access points, that it needs to be limited to the half mile and with frontage or backage roads. So, you know, I don't think we would want some of the problems we have on Eagle. And this is the time to do something about that. Zaremba: Amen to that. Rohm: Yeah. I think we all agree on that. Borup: Okay. Rohm: That we don't want a repeat of Eagle on Chinden and as long as we do that -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14,2005 Page 27 of 33 Zaremba: And access points is the biggest part of it. Borup: And if we limit the access points, then, the developers need to decide if it's a viable project for them to have commercial there or not. So, what I'm saying is to have flexibility on the Comp Plan designations that it can change as demand may change. Moe: Brad, did you not say, though -- don't remember the name of it, but for good growth? Hawkins-Clark: Blueprint. Moe: Okay. That, basically, we are nearing the point enough mixed use for that plan the way it's designed. Hawkins-Clark: Correct. That is what Compass and their modeling has come back with so far. That's what I was told last -- about three weeks ago. Moe: Okay. I ~ Zaremba: I could see when they consider the cities that are around the perimeter of the Treasure Valley, I can see that that could be a logical -- you know, to state, okay, here is your mix and that's what you ought to do. Meridian being right in the middle of all this and being the receiver of all of their traffic, is a little different animal and I'm -- of course, I don't know what the numbers are and how restrictive they are, but I -- you know, we could be the commercial center for the whole valley and that would be far out of whack with their numbers, probably. But we have an opportunity for Meridian that -- you know, not that I want to make it us against the other cities, but I would want to know how limiting they want to be. I think Meridian has an opportunity to be a commercial center for the whole valley and that may throw those numbers off. Again, a personal opinion. Moe: Actually, I think that's a very good point. That's a very good point. Hawkins-Clark: I think one thing you have not seen -- was there anything else on that point? I mean -- this is, obviously, an ongoing discussion, but -- Canning: I just wanted to point out that a huge problem we have with our Comp Plan is that the developers see mixed use and think commercial and you all are doing exactly the same thing, which is fine, but if it's -- if you really are thinking of commercial on Chinden -- now, maybe we should consider it a commercial designation, rather than a mixed used designation. That's alii was going to say. Rohm: I think that's a great point. It certainly clears things up a lot when we receive applications. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/WOrkshop July 14, 2005 Page 28 of 33 Canning: We have mixed use and if what they really want is commercial, then, let's call it what it is. Moe: But at the same time, I think there has been some developments that have come through that they have wanted to do more commercial within the mixed use and we have been able to explain to them, no, we do want to see the mixed use. I look at the project there on Eagle and Pine, you know, they were wanting to go a lot more commercial and we did require to do more mixed use in there. Canning: I just wanted to make sure you had the conversation, because I was hearing the two used interchangeably, so I wanted to make sure. Zaremba: I think what I would like to explore, among us or among you, or whatever, is sticking with the mixed use and traditional neighborhood theory, but maybe along Chinden, instead of making it radial, so that you maybe have a commercial and, then, down to retail, down to office, down to multi-family, down to single family in an expanding circle, that we make that lineal. All along Chinden the first 300 feet from Chinden is commercial, really commercial, and, then, the next 300 feet -- you just take your expanding circle and make it lineal, so that by the time you're a quarter of a mile from Chinden you're into multi-family and then -- I mean it's the same concept and within a larger area it's mixed use. Just a thought. I mean it -- Rohm: That's what I envisioned. Zaremba: I think all of those things do need to happen. I'm just not sure -- you know, I'm not sure that Chinden lends itself -- I'm not sure I would want to live in a residence on Chinden. It's going to be a busy street. But I think incorporating all those mixed uses within some distance from it is something to explore. Hawkins-Clark: Thinking about it from a transportation design standpoint, which we didn't talk about tonight, but which is part of this application, in terms of where are collectors going to go, our new collectors, you know, there is some logic to that in terms of running your Chinden frontage or back-age road, you know, and, then, having maybe another collector system that runs through there, you know. There is various patterns of development that planning purists have come up with over the years and, you know, some of them are more concentric and some of them are more boxy looking and -- Zaremba: Well, my inclination would be to stick with the circle idea at other intersections. Ustick -- you know, along Ustick I -- the same circle idea would appeal to me. I just see Chinden as a different -- something different, I guess. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. In terms of residential, I mean there is numerous examples, of course, of residential doing quite well on state highways. I mean you can drive down Eagle Road and you get almost into Eagle -- you know, into Eagle and I don't know that they are losing dramatic property values down there just because they are next to Highway 55. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14,2005 Page 29 of 33 Zaremba: That's true. The buffers are pretty. Rohm: Yeah. They have just taken that 300-foot and put it into a forest. Zaremba Yeah. It's a berm. Rohm: It's a berm. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Eagle -- yeah. Well, you know, on Chinden I mean you have Yorgason's project, Castleberry or whatever it's called, you know, on the north side of Chinden there. Eagle does have a 75 foot wide buffer requirement to help accommodate that, but -- okay. The two things, I guess, to point out before we move onto the next steps here, the draft policies that will actually be heart and soul of the text amendment, you haven't seen yet. Frankly, probably the most significant ones are going to be related to the preservation corridor. You know, a lot of the rest of them are going to be almost identical. But, in particular, how do we -- as the folks here tonight, you know, those people that reside -- if this moves on, you approve it, City Council approves it, and we are basically saying to ITD as a city, this is where we prefer this alignment to be. So, you have in that area -- I don't know what happened to our map, but in that area -- in that crooked area there are 95 -- again, following in there, there is 95 parcels of record, 74 property owners. Twenty-six of those parcels are zoned R-R, which means ten acre minimum and 69 of them are zoned RUT, which means five acre minimums. While the majority of the land area is, obviously, in the bigger parcels, the vast majority of them are actually small. The median parcel size in that area -- I just love doing these numbers. 4.8 acres. So, I guess what I'm getting at is we need to come up with some policies that deal with this area in helping us to preserve it and, you know, there is a couple different approaches we can go with. One is we would actually say in our Comp Plan, dear Ada County, we want to have an area of city impact agreement with you, but we want to amend it and we are asking you to -- instead of allowing one house per ten acres or one house per five acres, we are asking you to say one house per 30 acres or one house per 40 acres -- you know, sort of control it more on a density -- now there is maybe -- there is legal issues, things there, because they -- there is a right that people have to do something with their property that you can't take away, unless you either buy it or, otherwise, legally, you know, preserve it. There is many different types of preservation methods for corridors. Unfortunately, ITD being so fiscally strapped, you know, a lot of those do have to do with money and -- but I guess I'm just pointing out that we haven't come up with the specifics and if you have thoughts, not that we are going to talk about all that tonight, but we -- that's one key point of discussion in terms of how we do that. Borup: Basically, you're saying no development until ITD decides on the alignment. Is that basically it? Hawkins-Clark: Within the scope of the law. I mean -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14,2005 Page 30 of 33 Borup: Yes. accomplish. No. I understand that. But that's probably what we are trying to Hawkins-Clark: Sure. Exactly. I mean ITD -- I think the City of Meridian should work with ITD to help them limit the amount of money it's going to cost to purchase that land and -- Borup: Exactly. And that's why people always complain about planning from 20, 30 years ago, because those type of things weren't done. You know, this is the time to do that and I feel real strong about right of way preservation or in this case it would be limiting development until that's decided. Once it's decided and the right of way is determined what they need, then, it's whatever needs to -- whatever can happen. Zaremba: The comment I was going to make is the issues that we face with trying to preserve McDermott as a corridor and make it ITD's default choice, even though they say they aren't going to make a decision until they have studied everything, we would face those same issues ten fold if we wanted to focus on Black Cat, probably 20 fold if we wanted to focus on Ten Mile. I mean the three possibilities -- I mean if you started back ten years or 20 years ago, Ten Mile was the logical choice. Well, since nothing happened during that time, the choice moves and, yes, we do need to do something to help the property owners. I mean we can't just say, no, you can't do anything with your property. That's not fair. Something does have to be done. But that's not unique to McDermott. We would have had to have done that anywhere else we did it and, as Commissioner Borup points out, at this point the cheapest place to do that is McDermott, because it's almost -- you know, it's out of fiscal realm to probably to do it at what -- on the places that would have been a good choice 20 years ago. Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. If we-- Zaremba: So, it isn't that this creates a unique problem, we would have had this problem no matter where we were trying to steer this. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. If we knew the exact alignment that would, obviously, help things a lot and it would impact fewer people and, you know, there is things like just excessive setbacks that you can do, you know, to keep people out of the actual right of way itself, but when it's a mile wide, setback really isn't a method. So, there needs to be some other options. So, that's one big area that you haven't seen that we will do some more thinking on and get something back to you. The other key piece that you haven't seen is a collector map and some transit -- a little bit more detail on transit and some policies there. So, one question for you is knowing that you haven't seen those two things and we haven't talked about them, how -- would you like to schedule another workshop? Are you comfortable that just getting those two things in a formal application and setting them for a hearing -- how would you like to proceed? Zaremba: Commissioners? Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 31 of 33 Moe: Probably myself would probably like to have another workshop and be able to see that. I would anticipate -- are we, then, anticipating making the changes to the river and a few other things with this plan at that point? Borup: Well, I think that was the consensus from the Commission. Moe: Yes. Borup: The other information that would be coming you said would be the transportation information and ~- Hawkins-Clark: And the policies related to the preservation corridor. Borup: Okay. Aren't those -- but most of things could be presented at the beginning of a Public Hearing, though. Hawkins-Clark: They could. I think it's just how much would you like to talk about it before you get into a Public Hearing setting. Zaremba: My instinct probably would go with Commissioner Moe. I like to be more prepared at a Public Hearing and I probably would be in favor of having one more workshop, even if it were a short one, just to feel more prepared before we went into the Public Hearing. Borup: That makes sense. That's probably one we could do prior to a scheduled meeting even. Zaremba: Possible. Yeah. Have a pre-meeting for a half hour or something. Moe: I think that would be workable. Rohm: Yeah. I like that idea. Come in at 6:00 and we will have a workshop from 6:00 to 7:00 and, then, start our regularly scheduled P&Z meeting at that time. Borup: Staff would probably like that better, too. ~, ; ,~ '! Zaremba: Yeah. The one question I would ask -- and I'll betray the fact that I moved here after the interstate was built. There are certainly people around that would remember the process that was gone through in deciding the alignment for that and what happened to the property owners that suddenly had an interstate going to run right through the middle of their property. Is there any way to tap that knowledge? I don't even know if that's a logical question, but I mean this is -- it's not a new subject, it's just a new location. Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. I mean my first thought is probably be better to go for a jurisdiction that has dealt with it more recently, you know, because there has been -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005 Page 32 of 33 there is new tools that have come into play over the last 30 years that we can use, probably, that they didn't have when the 1-84 was going through, but -- Borup: In this case we are talking about a section line road, just increasing the right of way, isn't it? Hawkins-Clark: Not necessarily. Rohm: Well, that's why a half mile-- Borup: You're saying impact studies could designate it somewhere else, other than on - - all right. Canning: ITD is forced to look at more than one location, but the practical fact is that if we preserve a corridor right on McDermott, all of a sudden in their ERR is going to make -- it's going to make it look really good to be right on McDermott, because we preserved that corridor. So, ITD has acknowledged that they have to look at either side, but that the decisions that the City of Meridian makes regarding this will have a great deal of influence on the eventual results or those studies. Borup: But the study is not going to show that it makes more sense to run it a third or a quarter mile in from the section line -- Canning: They have to look at that. Borup: Right. Okay. Canning: But if there is a corridor preserved right at McDermott, then, the likelihood of a third of a mile off McDermott in the approved location is nil, I mean. Or minimal. Borup: Okay. Well, I mean that's the difference between this -- or what I saw of this and the freeway. The freeway don't believe followed an existing road at all. Wait a minute. Or did it. Was that the old highway? Rohm: The only part that I remember is from Meridian Road into Boise and Overland was the route that my family always took into Boise from Meridian on in and the freeway surplanted that. Well, Franklin was Highway 30 -- Borup: And I think in the way of -- clear to Mountain Home was out there passed Micron and that road was I think how we headed onto Mountain Home on. Rohm: Did the freeway go through Meridian first and, then, finished out at Boise? Is what -- and you get off the freeway at Meridian and, then, you had to either go north to Franklin or south to Overland and -- to finish the route into Boise? I think that's what happened. Because I can remember that we would get off and drive Overland on into Boise back in the '60s or whenever that was. A long time ago. Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetingllNorkshop July 14,2005 Page 33 of 33 Borup: It might have still been a highway, but it was different than a section -- it's obviously not a section line road, was -- I guess was the only reason I even brought that up. Hawkins-Clark: We will have it all figured out at your next meeting. Moe: All right. Hawkins-Clark: Okay. Well, we will go ahead and incorporate some of these changes into the map, get some more information to you on the policies, do some research on maybe somebody who was involved with 1-84 and maybe even Eagle Road, which would be more similar to McDermott and, you know, see if we can get some lessons learned for you and we will set a 6:00 o'clock workshop, hopefully within the next month, before either your first meeting in August or your second meeting in August; is that -- Rohm: Works for me. Zaremba: Works for me. I know the second meeting in August, Commissioner Newton- Huckabay will not be here. She will be here for the first meeting, if that makes a difference. I think she'd like to be included. Hawkins-Clark: We will shoot for that. Zaremba: Anything else we need to say or do? I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Rohm: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Commissioner Rohm. Rohm: I move we adjourn. Moe: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:32 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) Meridian Planning & Zoning Special MeetinglWorkshop July 14, 2005 Page 34 of 33 APPROVED: 6 I ß I os DATE APPROVED DAVID ATTESTED: WILLIAM G. BERG JR., qTY -